Summer Mini-reviews
By Dan Brown Here are some brief reviews based on my recent comic-reading. As ever, there’s no logic to these choices – except the covers of each of these comics caught my eye when I was scanning the new-release wall at L.A. Mood. Ghost Rider Vs. Galactus No. 1: If you’re in the mood for some old-fashioned cosmic storytelling in the classic Marvel style, then this one-off is for you. Although it’s billed as a showdown between the two title characters, in writer J. Michael Straczynski’s hands the story becomes a meditation on the amoral nature of the gigantic planet-eater. Since he’s a force of nature, does Galactus feel any remorse for the trillions of lives he has snuffed out in the process of devouring worlds to sustain himself? Or ijs he beyond human concepts of morality? And hey, what is the purpose of the universe anyway? The gritty art from Juan Ferreyra is also amazing. Co-stars the ever-loving Thing. Mouse Guard: Dawn of the Black Axe No. 1-3: Mouse Guard is one of my favourite comics of all time. The only drawback with this now-completed Archaia/Boom Studios! series is it doesn’t feature creator David Petersen’s art. Gabriel Rodriguez, a powerhouse in his own right, supplies the pencils for this origin story of the side character Black Axe. I just wish Petersen could clone himself so he could get more comics done faster! If you, like me, are nostalgic for Petersen’s warm lines, check out the Belly of the Beast 20th anniversary reprint. The Mouse Guard, forest rangers of a medieval mouse society, are not to be trifled with! Marvel Swimsuit Special No. 1: This is a fun summer time-waster that ends with the Watcher face-palming. The story, as thin as it is, has Janet Van Dyne’s Wasp corralling Marvel’s superheroes to put out a swimsuit issue. Why? It’s part of a public-relations war with the evil energy company Roxxon. This is full of pin-ups, so parents should keep that in mind. I love the Adam Hughes cover, as well as the cameo by Deadpool, who asks, “Did someone start a crossover without me?” There’s a sly reference to the comics industry, when the Winter Soldier states, “Periodicals haven’t made money since I’ve been back from the dead.” Oh, there are also redundant pinups, like the Submariner, who is never NOT wearing his swim trunks. Pop Kill No. 4: The concluding issue of a story about an actual cola war from Mad Cave Studios. It is ultraviolent with lots of skin, so I recommend it for mature readers. This is the kind of comic I imagine Quentin Tarantino would love. Godzilla Vs. Spider-Man No. 1: One of the better one-shots featuring the giant lizard facing off against Marvel’s heroes. Played for laughs, this one takes place just after Secret Wars in Marvel’s continuity – you have to be an long-time fan like me to get all the jokes, and there is one idea in this book that deserves to be developed more: Godvenom. Godzilla Vs. Thor No. 1: This also takes place out of regular Marvel continuity and features “unstoppable Asgardian versus unkillable monster.” The metaphysical turn the story takes didn’t work for me because it feels like the creative team was trying to do too much, but I’ll still be looking out for the Walt Simonson variant cover! Bring on the Bad Guys: Doom No. 1: The selling point for this one is the art by Stefano Raffaell, which includes a two-page splash page of hell. Victor, can you say hello to Ozzy Osbourne while you’re down there? Star Wars No. 1, 2: This new series takes place after Return of the Jedi in the Star Wars timeline, with Luke, Leia and Han Solo dealing with the remnants of the Empire as the fledgling New Republic tries to gain a toe-hold across the galaxy. I would recommend this title for fans only. While we’re talking Star Wars, I have a suggestion: How about a comic exploring the connection (if any) between Andor’s Luthen Rael and Solo’s Enfys Nest? Did the latter fund the former, or were they involved in competing revolutions? I think there’s a story there to be told. Conan the Barbarian No. 21: The best part about this issue is the cover – Conan’s smouldering stare fixes on the reader. The illustration is by Dan Panosian, who also supplies the interior art. Reading Conan on glossy paper is a different experience than the pulpy paper of yesteryear – you can feel the barbarism! Also for mature readers. What comics or graphic novels have you been reading this summer? If you have recommendations from your own reading, I’d love to hear about them in the comment box below! Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
Network Talk Shows Are Played Out
By Dan Brown Given the fuss over the axing of the Late Show With Stephen Colbert, you might get the impression network talk shows matter. They don’t. Such programs haven’t mattered for years, and few TV viewers would notice if ALL of them went off the air. The format of a monologue, phony interviews, then a musical performance is played out. In a world in which seemingly every slightly famous person hosts a podcast, network talk shows are not the draw they once were. When was the last time you watched an episode of Colbert from start to finish? What about the likes of Jimmy Fallon, Jimmy Kimmel, or Seth Myers? Contrast those guys with Johnny Carson. He was such a fixture back in the day that his retirement from late night in 1992 amounted to a cultural earthquake. Carson’s heyday was a different era. Network TV ruled the roost, with cable coming on strong. When the Carson-inspired David Letterman took off in the 1980s, his brand of late-night comedy was considered edgy, dangerous, subversive. You WANTED to stay up late to see what Dave was up to. Fast-forward to 2025 and it feels as though the list of celebrities who have hosted a late-night chat show at some point in their careers is longer than the list of those who haven’t. They aren’t special anymore. No one is interested in watching a procession of minor stars fake their way through a pre-scripted interview to promote their latest project. We can get our entertainment news in so many different places now, and the supply of celebs far outstrips the demand. The last late-night interview that mattered aired in 1995, when Jay Leno got to ask Hugh Grant why he had hired a prostitute named Divine Brown days earlier: “What the hell were you thinking?” in 2025, no one is eagerly anticipating the next guest who will step out from behind the curtain. Networks have hung on far longer than anyone thought they would, but according to the Los Angeles Times, the proportion of the television viewing audience watching streaming is now larger than that watching linear TV. Talk shows were relatively cheap to make when companies actually advertised their wares on network TV. In their day, they had cultural sway. A new generation has taken the format and is running with it, doing interesting things online. The idea of an interview show with the guests all eating spicy hot wings might sound loony, but it actually works. Or how about a parody of talk shows called Between Two Ferns on which every interview is hilariously uncomfortable? Maybe you would rather watch yet another minor movie actor talk about what a great time they had on set making the latest programmatic Hollywood sludge. You’re in a shrinking minority. If talk shows on network TV have accomplished anything down through the decades, they’ve killed interviewing as an art form with their rehearsed conversations. Which is OK. With a million podcasts to choose from, none of which are time-limited, on any number of platforms, we’ve got space for all the genuine follow-up questions imaginable. That’s where the real talk is taking place with hosts who don’t need to feign their interest. Oh, and just for the record, the best talk show ever was on pay TV – it was called Night After Night and was hosted by Allan Havey with sidekick Nick Bakay in the early 1990s. I taped it every night. So let’s retire network talk shows — all of them. At least for a few years or decades. Letting the genre lie fallow for a while can only lead to positive things for the entertainment industry. Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
A Fantastic Four Primer
By Dan Brown This column is for those readers who are considering going to see The Fantastic Four: First Steps but don’t know a lot about comics lore. Here’s your primer from an old FF fan. But be warned – I haven’t seen the movie (it lands in theatres Friday), so I can’t tell you exactly how much it differs from the comics. The first issue of Fantastic Four came out in 1961, and is generally considered the launching point for the Marvel Universe. It caused a sensation, making the rest of the Marvel lineup possible. Such heroes as Spider-Man and teams like the Avengers followed in the wake of the FF’s success. The title had a sci-fi flavour and introduced (or at least popularized) a number of superhero innovations. The main characters were Reed Richards, whose pliable mind is matched only by his elastic body; Sue Storm, who is Reed’s transparent wife, and is also able to project force fields; the hothead Johnny Storm, who can burst into living flame; and Ben Grimm, Reed’s college buddy, who looks like a pile of orange rocks. One of the main innovations is that while the FF have superhero names (Mister Fantastic, Invisible Woman, the Human Torch, the Thing), they do not have secret identities. Originally a group of astronaut explorers, they operate with the general public knowing their real identities. From the movie clips I’ve seen online, it looks as though the new film’s makers are leaning heavily into the FF’s status as a family. This is what sets them apart from other superhero teams like, say, the X-Men. And while they do have uniforms, they wear them only on the job. Another innovation is, as with so many families, the Fantastic Four is a dysfunctional one. Although Reed is the FF’s leader, they are constantly squabbling about something. This tension exemplified Marvel’s new breed of superheroes with real-world problems. This was all in contrast to DC’s emotionally constipated heroes – Superman and Batman among them. It was the brand difference that eventually put Marvel on top of the comics sales charts. The FF got their powers after a freak rocket accident. These aren’t necessarily considered a blessing, particularly by Grimm, who is a self-loather. The reluctant superhero was a relatively new concept at the time. Their adventures were cosmic in scope, and thanks to co-creator Jack Kirby’s pencil work, had a trippy vibe to them. The enemies they fought include Annihilus, ruler of a dimension called the Negative Zone. And the Sub-Mariner, who lorded over the Earth’s oceans. Doctor Doom was an old college rival of Mister Fantastic who had mastered the mystic arts en route to inventing a time machine. No villain better demonstrates the raison d’etre of the FF than Galactus. More than merely evil, Galactus is a planet-eater whose existence as a force of nature puts him beyond human morality. Our heroes have cheated him out of devouring Earth many a time. Again, judging from clips on the web, it looks as though Galactus will be the main adversary appearing in the new motion picture. Another innovation has the FF living in a real city, New York, not an anonymous one created for the comics. Kirby’s run as penciller on Fantastic Four ended after almost a decade. Since then, different artists have worked on the title, including sometime Canadian John Bryne whose time as FF artist/writer is considered by many to be second in importance only to Kirby and Stan Lee’s run. The team has had substitute members over the decades, always returning to the same core foursome. The comic, similar to any long-lived title, has had its creative ups and downs. There have, you may have heard, been previous Fantastic Four movies – none of them all that great. I thought the 2005 adaptation was a solid B movie, but suffered from how cheaply it was made. How low was its budget? They didn’t even have enough money to pay for the effects showing Grimm transforming into the Thing. Talk about made on the cheap. Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
Gen X Feels Unloved
By Dan Brown Our mothers smoked when they were pregnant with us. We were born before the first moon landing. As kids growing up, we had joysticks, not gaming controllers. We started our careers in the 1990s. We may be the last generation for whom home ownership was not a pipe dream. And we were horrified to learn Shoppers Drug Mart now considers us senior citizens. Who are we? We’re Generation X. And we’re pissed. With today’s twentysomethings in the headlines constantly, we can’t help feeling a bit unloved. All we read and hear about is Generation Z, Zoomers, the Net Gen, whatever you want to call them. Apparently they are the coddled generation that can’t live without their cellphones. You may have complained about them yourself. So if we could have the spotlight back, that would be great. Because here’s the thing: Long before old people hated on them, we Gen Xers were the object of your scorn. No one remembers now, but older generations scoffed at us just as vehemently. They said we were aimless. We were derided for being cynical. They called us slackers. Baby Busters. The 13th generation. We suffered by comparison, of course, to the Baby Boomers. While they had careers, we had McJobs. If Baby Boomers had been raised by the television set, we were raised by cable. While Boomers had the coolness of Woodstock, we had the commercialism of MTV. Even their movies were infinitely cooler. The Boomers had the Big Chill. We had to settle for trash like the Breakfast Club. St. Elmo’s Fire was written off as “the Little Chill.” Us Gen Xers, we never got the heed and media scrutiny the Baby Boomers got, and Gen Z seems to have all the time now. Why, I could swear no one wants to hear our boring Generation X stories anymore. Like how in our day, we didn’t have free love, we faced the deadly threat of AIDS. How we grew up in the closing days of the Cold War, convinced civilization would end in a mushroom cloud. That’s why we watched eagerly as the Berlin Wall came down. We’re the last generation with memories of what life was like before the internet and Google. Strange as it may sound to young folks, we use our cellphones to actually make phone calls. And speaking of phones, we can tell you about a time when the phone rang – and you had to pick it up to find out who was calling. We were free-range children, latchkey kids who came home from grade school to a house empty of Dad and Mom. Unlike Generation Z, we aren’t digital natives (but luckily for us, our youthful mistakes weren’t livestreamed to a global audience). And yes, I’m exaggerating. A bit. The unsaid truth is, today’s twentysomethings are actually – surprise! – amazing. I work with university students and I’m convinced they are going to save the world. They have no choice except to rescue it, because we screwed the place up for them. Nor is any of this unique to any particular generation. The truth is, every older generation hates on the younger ones that come after it. The older demographic hated the Boomers who became Yuppies in the 1980s. Back in his day, in the 1930s, Ernest Hemingway was considered a member of the Lost Generation. Talk about a derisive nickname. The truth is, as they come of age, no generation’s members have it easy. We’re all doomed to make the same mistakes and learn the same lessons since human nature never changes. And yes, I grant you it is absolutely true that making generalizations about an entire generation is a foolish project. It’s self-defeating, of that I am aware. We’re all individuals, regardless of the decade in which we were born. So hey, spare some empathy for us Gen Xers as we retire and fade away. When the history books are written, please don’t write us out of the story altogether. We’re not dead yet. Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
I’m the Odd Man Out as GNG Takes on Roaming
By Dan Brown SPOILER WARNING: This column contains details from the graphic novel Roaming, so if you value surprise stop reading right now! Here’s the rundown on the most recent meeting of the L.A. Mood Graphic-Novel Group, which was held Saturday, July 12. The book: Jillian and Mariko Tamaki’s Roaming, which follows three Canadian first-year university students on a five-day trip to New York City. The discussion: In short, I was in the minority as the only GNG member who really enjoyed the book. Odd man out, as usual! GNG has a custom of choosing a Canadian comic for our July meeting, so we honoured that tradition with this selection. (By sheer coincidence, it comes on the heels of two other books by Canadian creators in May and June.) I, along with one other member of the group, pitched Roaming back in January. While I love everything by the Tamakis, other members of the group strongly disliked Roaming, including someone who couldn’t even finish the thing. The thick volume centres on Dani, Fiona, and Zoe, three university students who take a trip to New York for a brief holiday from their studies. It’s very much a story about the problems of young people, which I think is where most of the antipathy comes from. No one at the table said it wasn’t a realistic portrayal of characters in their late teens/early twenties – in fact, the problem seemed to be it was too accurate. Carol Vandenberg, co-owner of L.A. Mood, said Roaming didn’t work for her because it isn’t leavened with humour. The trio of characters see Big Apple sights, go to bars, get coffee, eat pizza, and of course there’s a drama because Fiona is an interloper who threatens Dani and Zoe’s friendship. Spats ensue. Carol made the point that if you’re going to tell a story about young people, a better approach would have been the one John Hughes adopted with the movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off: Play the foibles of youth for laughs. Gord Mood, L.A. Mood’s other owner, echoed that sentiment, adding the example of another funny coming-of-age comedy, Dazed and Confused. Several elements prevented GNG members from enjoying the travel tale including the ending, which doesn’t wrap anything up. Other members said the art was prosaic, and that a flashback scene – in which we observe Dani and Zoe at a high-school party – wasn’t introduced in a way the reader could understand. Why do I feel differently? Part of my reason for pitching the book was how the character of Fiona is a huge drama queen. Very early in the book, there are signals to readers to treat anything she says with skepticism. The question in my own mind was, “Can we appreciate this book even if one of the leads is an awful person?” After all, if an artist and writer can create a comic with a character who turns you off, isn’t the fact you reacted to a fictional character like you would to a real person a sign the creative team has done a good job? (Would be interested in any opinions on this question in the comment box below.) I also believe there’s something darkly funny about a group of friends whose relationship revolves around avoiding roaming charges on their cellphones. As it turned out, Fiona was just one of the reasons GNG members didn’t enjoy the book, although someone suggested a comic depicting the same characters once they are out of school and taking on careers might make for a better read. Further reading: If you aren’t daunted by now, two other graphic novels by the Tamakis come to mind – Skim (it follows high-school friends) and This One Summer (which features a tween lead). L.A. Mood’s Graphic-Novel Group meets the second Saturday of each month. Next month’s selection is I Am Stan, Tom Scioli’s graphic biography of the one-time Marvel Comics editor-in-chief. You might have heard of Lee before! We will reconvene August 9 at the gaming tables in the store at 11 a.m. You are invited to come join the discussion! Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
AI Doesn’t Even Have the Brainpower of a Lazy Journalist
By Dan Brown Journalists work hard. I know. I’ve had a long career as one. But in one recent instance, a newspaper reporter substituted artificial intelligence for basic journalism legwork, and did more damage than just disgracing himself. His error was so monumental, it affects all of us in the Fourth Estate. You may have heard about it. In May, the Chicago Sun-Times published a mea culpa after it published a list of 15 books to read this summer. This was part of its summer preview supplement. The problem: 10 of the books don’t exist. The writer who had been assigned the story, Marco Buscaglia, used a shortcut to generate the article. “Rather than a reported recommendation list, this one had been generated by an AI agent,” explained Melissa Bell, the head of the non-profit that owns the daily, in the apology to readers that followed. For some reason, neither Buscaglia nor the copy editors at the paper bothered to check the accuracy of the titles he was recommending. “The section was licensed from the third-party content provider King Features, a division of Hearst. The content wasn’t produced by Sun-Times journalists, nor was it reviewed by the newsroom prior to placement in the paper,” Bell added. Trust me when I say not one Chicago Sun-Times reader in 100 cares that the article wasn’t produced in-house. In my experience, the audience doesn't make a distinction between stories written by a newspaper’s own employees versus wire copy. So it is the Chicago Sun-Times that will take the full hit to its credibility. But it doesn’t stop there. This incident will tarnish all journalists. It gives more fodder to the media haters who want to discredit the work reporters, photographers, and editors do. Why is it in their interest to erode the image of journalists? So the public doesn’t listen to the media when it sounds the alarm. And there is an even more aggravating aspect to this incident. Do you know how much effort it would have taken that journo to generate a list of 15 books to read this summer? Not much. Trust me. If you’re not a journalist, let me break it down for you. You can trust me – I have made many such lists of events to attend, movies to watch, graphic novels to read, for publication in national, regional, city and campus papers. I hope my fellow journos don’t hate me for revealing these tricks of the trade, but in the grand scope of journalism this is not a tough assignment. First of all, any really good journalist is an avid reader. Given a reasonable bit of time, they would be able to generate 15 suggestions based just on the books they have recently read. Or you could consult publishers, who put out real books that deserve promoting. Or talk to a librarian or two. How about local book clubs? Or check the bestseller lists. Are you getting the picture? This is why this is more about journalistic laziness than technology. One writer decided it wasn’t worth even the minimal effort it would have taken to carry out his assignment. And now the rest of us have to pay the price. Dan Brown has covered pop culture for more than 32 years as a journalist and also moderates L.A. Mood’s monthly graphic-novel group.
